Children learning English as an additional language (EAL) often experience lower academic attainment than monolingual peers. In this study, teachers provided ratings of English language proficiency and social, emotional, and behavioral functioning for 782 children with EAL and 6,485 monolingual children in reception year (ages 4–5). Academic attainment was assessed in reception and Year 2 (ages 6–7). Relative to monolingual peers with comparable English language proficiency, children with EAL displayed fewer social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties in reception, were equally likely to meet curriculum targets in reception, and were more likely to meet targets in Year 2. Academic attainment and social, emotional, and behavioral functioning in children with EAL are associated with English language proficiency at school entry.

Background: Meeting recruitment targets for randomised controlled trials is challenging.  This trial evaluated the effectiveness of including a pen within the trial invitation pack on the recruitment of older adults into a randomised controlled trial. Methods: This trial was embedded within the Occupational Therapist Intervention Study, a falls-prevention randomised controlled trial.  Potential participants (n = 1862), who were posted an invitation pack from two General Practitioner practices, were randomised to either not receive a pen (n = 1295) or receive a pen (n = 648) with their invitation pack, using a 2:1 ratio.  The primary outcome was the likelihood of being randomised, and therefore fully recruited, to the host trial.  To be randomised to the host trial, participants had to: return a consent form and screening form; be eligible on their screening form; and return a baseline questionnaire and a monthly falls calendar.  Secondary outcomes were: the likelihood of returning (and time to return) a screening form; being eligible for the host trial; and remaining in the trial for at least 3 months. Results: The likelihood of being randomised to the host trial did not differ between the pen group (4.5%) and no pen group (4.3%; odds ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval: 0.65 to 1.67; p = 0.86).  There were marginal differences in secondary outcomes in favour of the pen group, particularly in screening form return rates, though these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Pens may not be an effective incentive for the recruitment of older adults into randomised controlled trials, though future trials are required. Registration: ISRCTN22202133; SWAT 37.

Background Falls and fall-related fractures are highly prevalent among older people and are a major contributor to morbidity and costs to individuals and society. Only one small pilot trial has evaluated the effectiveness of a home hazard assessment and environmental modification in the UK. This trial reported a reduction in falls as a secondary outcome, and no economic evaluation was undertaken. Therefore, the results need to be confirmed and a cost-effectiveness analysis needs to be undertaken. Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a home hazard assessment and environmental modification delivered by occupational therapists for preventing falls among community-dwelling people aged ≥ 65 years who are at risk of falling, relative to usual care. Design This was a pragmatic, multicentre, modified cohort randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation and a qualitative study. Setting Eight NHS trusts in primary and secondary care in England. Participants In total, 1331 participants were randomised (intervention group, n = 430; usual-care group, n = 901) via a secure, remote service. Blinding was not possible. Interventions All participants received a falls prevention leaflet and routine care from their general practitioner. The intervention group were additionally offered one home environmental assessment and modifications recommended or provided to identify and manage personal fall-related hazards, delivered by an occupational therapist. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the number of falls per participant during the 12 months from randomisation. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of fallers and multiple fallers, time to fall, fear of falling, fracture rate, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Results The primary analysis included all 1331 randomised participants and indicated weak evidence of a difference in fall rate between the two groups, with an increase in the intervention group relative to usual care (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.38; p = 0.07). A similar proportion of participants in the intervention group (57.0%) and the usual-care group (56.2%) reported at least one fall over 12 months. There were no differences in any of the secondary outcomes. The base-case cost-effectiveness analysis from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective found that, on average per participant, the intervention was associated with additional costs (£18.78, 95% confidence interval £16.33 to £21.24), but was less effective (mean quality-adjusted life-year loss –0.0042, 95% confidence interval –0.0041 to –0.0043). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated uncertainty in these findings. No serious, related adverse events were reported. The intervention was largely delivered as intended, but recommendations were followed to a varying degree. Limitations Outcome data were self-reported by participants, which may have led to inaccuracies in the reported falls data. Conclusions We found no evidence that an occupational therapist-delivered home assessment and modification reduced falls in this population of community-dwelling participants aged ≥ 65 years deemed at risk of falling. The intervention was more expensive and less effective than usual care, and therefore it does not provide a cost-effective alternative to usual care. Future work An evaluation of falls prevention advice in a higher-risk population, perhaps those previously hospitalised for a fall, or given by other professional staff could be justified. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN22202133. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 46. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Monolingual-normed language batteries in the majority language may have some practical value for identifying bilingual children who need support with language learning, regardless of the origin of their language difficulties.

Background: Falls in older people are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. There is some evidence to suggest that home hazard assessment and environmental modification delivered by an occupational therapist may reduce falls. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention, relative to usual care. Methods: A pragmatic, two-arm modified cohort randomised controlled trial in eight NHS trusts in primary and secondary care in England. In total, 1331 community-dwelling adults aged 65 years and over with a history of falls or fear of falling were randomised in a 2:1 allocation to either usual care plus a falls prevention leaflet (n=901) or to receive the home hazard assessment and environmental modification intervention, plus usual care and a falls prevention leaflet (n=430). The primary outcome was the number of falls per participant over the 12 months from randomisation. Secondary outcomes included: proportion of fallers and multiple fallers, time to fall, and fear of falling. Results: All 1331 randomised participants (mean age 80 years, 872 [65.5%] female) were included in the primary analysis. There was a small increase in the rate of falls in the intervention group relative to usual care (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.17, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.38; p=0.07). A similar proportion of participants in the intervention (57.0%) and usual care group (56.2%) reported at least one fall over 12 months. There were no differences in any of the other secondary outcomes and no serious, related adverse events were reported.  Conclusions: Home hazard assessment and environmental modification delivered by an occupational therapist did not reduce falls in community-dwelling older people deemed at higher risk of falling recruited to this trial.